I feel like I have let down my community. I claim to be the azsportsmeister but haven’t said anything about the 2001…I mean 2011 Arizona Diamondbacks. I love this team! And the best part is, they are finally starting to get some national pub. With their 35th comeback win on Monday against the Phillies, the D-Backs now have a 3.5 game lead over the Giants. Now, part of this publicity is because ESPN is promoting a Wednesday night game to be aired on their network. Whatever the reason, I’ll take it. This team deserves some credit and will certainly be getting a lot of national attention over the years with the promising (and affordable) young players that they have. Take a look at the list of young core players on this roster: Justin Upton, 23, $4 million; Chris Young, 27, $5 million; Gerardo Parra, 24, $400k; Miguel Montero, 28, $3 million, Stephen Drew, 28, $4.5 million; Paul Goldschmidt, 23; Ian Kennedy, 24, $400k; Daniel Hudson, 23; $400k. That is one heck of a young core. There isn’t a single everyday player over 30 years old, and this list doesn’t even mention the minor leaguers waiting in the wings. Consider this 2013 (possibly late 2012) starting rotation: Ian Kennedy, 27; Daniel Hudson, 26; Jarrod Parker, 25; Tyler Skaggs, 23; and Tyler Bauer, 23. All five of those players could realistically be in the starting rotation starting in 2013. The future is bright for this team, and I haven’t even mentioned the fact the Justin Upton, at age 23, is now becoming the player we all expected him to be when he was drafted as a 17 year-old high schooler. And the best part of that story is the fact that he is signed through 2015…giggidy.
----------------------------
I’ve got a beef that I need to get off my chest. I don’t think I can take anymore of Dan Bickley. Like a lot of valley residents, Bickley is a transplant from the Midwest, Chicago to be exact. The problem with Bickley isn’t that he still holds onto his rooting interests from his youth. The problem is that tries to tell real Arizona sports fans how to support their teams. I don’t want to be lectured on how to be a fan by a guy who couldn’t hack it as a writer in his own town all the while continuing to root for his old teams. Dan Bickley, cool it on the lectures or go back and lecture your old pals in Chicago.
-----------------------------
My buddy John (That’s right John, you just got mentioned in a widely-read, masterful, sports blog) alerted me to Zach Lowe’s list of the top 100 NBA players and just how egregiously he ruined the list. After a careful review, Lowe’s biggest error was not putting The Jimmer in the top 5. (That was a joke…I promise. Actually, Lowe didn’t even have him on his list at all…and I’m okay with that.)
The problem with lists like these is that it is incredibly difficult to really accurately rate and compare players. Basketball is too reliant on matchups and specific roles. A better way to compare players might be their trade value, like Bill Simmons puts out every season; either way, its still fun to compare and argue. After looking at the list, the biggest problem I had was Blake Griffin rated #14. He is a great player, and under the trade value system he would be right at the top of the list because of his age and wow factor. On a list of the best NBA players, there is no way he ranks ahead of Tim Duncan, Steve Nash, Chris Bosh, Kevin Garnett, Amare Stoudemire and Paul Pierce.
This may be my homerism, but I can’t let Steve Nash stay at #18. Even at his age he has not slipped a bit. He should be right there in the top ten with Deron Williams and Chris Paul, at least for a few more seasons.
Next biggest issue is Dwight Howard at #2. Dwight Howard is great. As far as trade value goes, again, he is at the top of the list. However, he has been in the league for seven years and he is just barely beginning to develop an offensive game. I’ve written this before and I’ll write it again. Amare Stoudemire gets killed for his defense and rebounding, but Dwight Howard gets a free pass for his offensive skills because he’s got a million-dollar smile and McDonald’s commercial. Now, would I rather have Howard? Of course, but it still bothers me.
The last issue that I want to raise is Kevin Durant at #8. This guy is a scoring machine. Deron Williams and Chris Paul need other players around them to make a good team. Durant might be the closest thing to a one-man team next to LeBron.
With that said, here is my own top 10:
10. Dirk Nowitzki
9. Dwight Howard
8. Deron Williams
7. Steve Nash
6. Derrick Rose
5. Chris Paul
4. Kobe Bryant
3. Dwayne Wade
2. Kevin Durant
1. LeBron James
Wednesday, August 17, 2011
The U Did it Again
It should not be of any surprise to college sports fans that the University of Miami is being investigated on charges of NCAA violations. When I saw this headline I read it and immediately moved on and didn’t think twice about it. Miami is just another university in a long line of prominent athletic programs to get busted for rules violations. Just think about all of the players, coaches and universities in the past year that have been in the news for improprieties: Cam Newton, Terrell Pryor, Jim Tressel, Oregon, Chip Kelly, North Carolina, Georgia Tech, USC and now Miami. The difference with this story is that the charges are much bigger and broader. Many pundits are throwing around the possibility of the infamous “Death Penalty” which has only been doled out once to a football program (SMU back in the ‘80’s).
If the NCAA gives Miami the death penalty then they are opening the door to kill traditional college football as we know it. Think about this: there were many very prominent players and former players (now NFL players) on the list of people who received improper benefits from booster Nevin Shapiro. Now remember this, Miami hasn’t been any good since Butch Davis’s players left for the NFL. Shouldn’t Miami be dominating college football like they did in the 1980’s under Howard Schnellenberger, Jimmy Johnosn and Dennis Erickson? This begs the question: what are the top college teams doing that we don’t know about…yet? Actually, we have a decent idea of what the other teams are doing. Take the two teams in the BCS Championship game from last year, Auburn and Oregon. Auburn landed a star quarterback, Cam Newton, who was allegedly being shopped around in a pay-for-play agreement after Mississippi State said that they were told they needed to pay $180,000 to land Newton. Oregon, on the other hand, has had multiple run-ins with the law along with some shady connections with a recruiting service. It seems pretty intuitive that to become a national powerhouse in college football that you need to break the rules. I refuse to believe that these kids are passing on the Miami’s of the world in favor of other top programs because they think facilities are better, or because the coach knows his X’s and O’s better. Now, if Miami does in fact receive the death penalty then it leads me to believe that there are many other top college programs that could potentially receive the same penalty.
There are a few different ways the NCAA can take this. The first is to just go on without changing anything, pretending most programs are clean until a news source brings them to light and punishing the newfound offenders. Second, they can drastically increase their investigative staff and vociferously go after every single rules violation on the books and punish them accordingly. Those two are probably the most likely scenarios, because they keep the cash flow from boosters to universities moving. Even with increased oversight, schools and boosters are just going to put more resources and efforts into hiding their violations. My solutions are much more drastic. If the NCAA really wants to clean up college athletics then they need to get rid of boosters altogether. If the government can put caps on the amount of money people can give to political campaigns, why can’t the NCAA limit or dispel contributions to athletic departments? If wealthy alumni want to make contributions to a school then make sure the university presidents have the ability to put all or part of that money toward actual education. Put everyone on a level playing field. Reduce the number of dollars going into the business. Share television revenue among all Division I schools. Base athletic budgets entirely off of ticket sales and merchandise revenue. Right now there are many schools that are operating athletic departments without big donations from boosters. If they can do it, then everyone can do it. The solution is to make the business of college athletics as less of a business as possible.
The other option is to completely take college athletics out of colleges. Turn them into profession or semi-professional club teams. If universities want to participate than that is fine, let them sponsor a team by offering their name, colors, tradition and whatever facilities they currently have. But, these club teams will operate entirely out of the purview of the university. There can be a club team in each university city and the club can offer a tuition stipend as part of any compensation the market dictates. This way, we can solve the problem of player compensation, minor league football, and still let the majority of athletes who are not going to make the NFL still receive money for college to gain a valuable education. And if we make these teams non-profit organizations than boosters can still receive tax deductions for any charitable contributions. Boosters can supply all the money they want and educational institutions do not need to have reputations tarnished because of impropriety. This solution will shift the charade of college athletics from the notion of amateurism to the feeling of tradition and history.
If the NCAA gives Miami the death penalty then they are opening the door to kill traditional college football as we know it. Think about this: there were many very prominent players and former players (now NFL players) on the list of people who received improper benefits from booster Nevin Shapiro. Now remember this, Miami hasn’t been any good since Butch Davis’s players left for the NFL. Shouldn’t Miami be dominating college football like they did in the 1980’s under Howard Schnellenberger, Jimmy Johnosn and Dennis Erickson? This begs the question: what are the top college teams doing that we don’t know about…yet? Actually, we have a decent idea of what the other teams are doing. Take the two teams in the BCS Championship game from last year, Auburn and Oregon. Auburn landed a star quarterback, Cam Newton, who was allegedly being shopped around in a pay-for-play agreement after Mississippi State said that they were told they needed to pay $180,000 to land Newton. Oregon, on the other hand, has had multiple run-ins with the law along with some shady connections with a recruiting service. It seems pretty intuitive that to become a national powerhouse in college football that you need to break the rules. I refuse to believe that these kids are passing on the Miami’s of the world in favor of other top programs because they think facilities are better, or because the coach knows his X’s and O’s better. Now, if Miami does in fact receive the death penalty then it leads me to believe that there are many other top college programs that could potentially receive the same penalty.
There are a few different ways the NCAA can take this. The first is to just go on without changing anything, pretending most programs are clean until a news source brings them to light and punishing the newfound offenders. Second, they can drastically increase their investigative staff and vociferously go after every single rules violation on the books and punish them accordingly. Those two are probably the most likely scenarios, because they keep the cash flow from boosters to universities moving. Even with increased oversight, schools and boosters are just going to put more resources and efforts into hiding their violations. My solutions are much more drastic. If the NCAA really wants to clean up college athletics then they need to get rid of boosters altogether. If the government can put caps on the amount of money people can give to political campaigns, why can’t the NCAA limit or dispel contributions to athletic departments? If wealthy alumni want to make contributions to a school then make sure the university presidents have the ability to put all or part of that money toward actual education. Put everyone on a level playing field. Reduce the number of dollars going into the business. Share television revenue among all Division I schools. Base athletic budgets entirely off of ticket sales and merchandise revenue. Right now there are many schools that are operating athletic departments without big donations from boosters. If they can do it, then everyone can do it. The solution is to make the business of college athletics as less of a business as possible.
The other option is to completely take college athletics out of colleges. Turn them into profession or semi-professional club teams. If universities want to participate than that is fine, let them sponsor a team by offering their name, colors, tradition and whatever facilities they currently have. But, these club teams will operate entirely out of the purview of the university. There can be a club team in each university city and the club can offer a tuition stipend as part of any compensation the market dictates. This way, we can solve the problem of player compensation, minor league football, and still let the majority of athletes who are not going to make the NFL still receive money for college to gain a valuable education. And if we make these teams non-profit organizations than boosters can still receive tax deductions for any charitable contributions. Boosters can supply all the money they want and educational institutions do not need to have reputations tarnished because of impropriety. This solution will shift the charade of college athletics from the notion of amateurism to the feeling of tradition and history.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)